


The Book of Sith: The Commentary of Darth Imperius

by Rens_Knight



Series: In the Burning of the Light [19]
Category: Star Wars - All Media Types, Star Wars Legends: The Old Republic
Genre: Gen, Journals, Meta, The Book of Sith, personal
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2017-05-21
Updated: 2017-05-27
Packaged: 2018-11-05 17:23:48
Rating: Teen And Up Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 7
Words: 11,214
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/11018043
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/Rens_Knight/pseuds/Rens_Knight
Summary: I am proud to introduce my collection of commentaries on The Book of Sith.Just like the characters whose comments are printed in the margins, I actually took a pen and handwrote in commentaries in the voice of my Light Sith Inquisitor from the SWTOR era, Darth Imperius, born as Tarssus Kallig.  To allow Tarssus to comment not just on the original texts, but the commentaries of characters up to and including Luke Skywalker himself, I wrote from the perspective of Tarssus as a Force-ghost, who is dictating notes to an unnamed amanuensis who records them for him in the margins of the text.From there, I selected what I considered to be the funniest or most thought-provoking of these margin notes from Tarssus Kallig, who reflects on both the writings of Sith gone before, and the remarks of the Sith and Jedi who come after and add their perspectives.  Sometimes Tarssus is deadly serious, sometimes wistful...and occasionally completely silly.  I hope you will enjoy his remarks!





	1. Luke's Introductory Note and Palpatine's Prologue

Before we get to Palpatine's prologue, there is a note at the beginning of the book from Luke Skywalker noting that this is a compilation by Palpatine of fragmentary texts, and that it has now come into his possession.  However, the rest is missing and he states it will never be known what the rest said.

> _My notes upon these, however, are complete, though understandably that will remain unverifiable to the living given the need to rely utterly on an[amanuensis](http://www.deviantart.com/users/outgoing?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanuensis).  Think critically, always!   Imperius_

Now into the Prologue that Palpatine wrote to this collection of texts...the Emperor tells the story of how he acquired them on the black market and states that, "The very existence of this illicit trade confirms many vital truths: Rulers seek to control information.  The powerful will do anything to hoard their power.  And if something is forbidden, it is likely a thing worth knowing."

> _Truly suppression engenders mystique.  And it takes what should be read thoughtfully to unquestioned holy writ when found. Imperius_

Palpatine cynically notes in a later handwritten addition that he hoped the Empire would provide him limitless reach, but that he still must rely on others to serve him.  "And they are so often foolish, flawed, and disappointing."

> _Makes you wonder about your own nature.  No?  Explains much about your fate. Imperius_

Palpatine then describes each of the texts and notes that in his opinion, each of the texts' authors "believed too rigidly in their own dogma.  If any of them could have met and shared their beliefs, they would have found little common ground."

> _Yet killing the room for such diversity and debate was our end. Imperius_


	2. The Journal of Sorzus Syn, "Founding Mother" of the First Sith Empire

Syn's first entry details the arrival on Korriban after being banished by the Jedi, who were "so confident in their triumph [that they] did not execute us." 

> _I owe my own existence to this Jedi error.  Yet that does not prevent it from being an error not to fight back against treason. Imperius_

Later, Syn tells the story of the way that she learned to warp life into monsters of her own design.  Mace Windu leaves a note in the margin stating that this violates the Force itself and furthermore, that "we are parts of the organism, not its breeders.  In the end we are living things too."  Yoda further notes that it is unbearable "to be a creature thus changed."  And in a rare formulation for a Jedi, he further notes that it is sometimes a mercy to end the lives of such creatures.  Tarssus is struck by this...and comes up with what may well be an effective in-universe explanation for a fundamental fact of the _Star Wars_ universe that is hard to account for in light of what we know is possible in our own time and place (but wasn't in the 70's), for perhaps this use of the Force also affected the course of science:

> _This likely created the refusal to practice genetics even for mercy and rely on cybernetics instead.  Unfortunately the tool and its wielder are once again confounded.  Is the change done with consideration of the changed or solely with an end result in mind?  I share the horror at cruel alterations but grieve the instances where lack of intervention produced prolonged suffering. Imperius_

Syn provides her initial perspective of the then "primitive" Sith Purebloods, by the standards of those who came from the Republic, and seems shocked to note, "Despite our obvious superior powers, we were not hailed as gods when we arrived."  (This would come later.)  Tarssus gives no quarter to this "Founding Mother" of his Force tradition, when he recalls Sith Purebloods from his own time such as my version of the Emperor's Wrath, and another who was a key member of the Dark Council, and observes:

>   
>  _Sorzus Syn implies this to be stupidity or intransigence simply for its own sake.  Though our Purebloods are hybrids_ _, my acquaintance of men like Rûmaz and Vowrawn furthers my belief that lack of technology equated to nothing of the sort in intelligence. Imperius_

In other words, "primitive" does _not_ equal "stupid."  And _not_ worshipping angry invaders as gods seems like a smart move.

As one might expect, Tarssus pays particularly close attention to an entry Syn wrote on Sith weaponry, given the blacksmithing work he did as a slave.  Rather than lightsabers, the Sith Purebloods used bladed weapons such as swords and daggers that were enhanced by use of the Force, just as the first "Jedi" did on Tython.  It's not hard to picture the excited smile on his face when he dictated the following note: 

> _I forged many weapons akin to these while a slave.  I wonder if I imbued any with the Force without my knowing! Imperius_

Yoda then leaves a comment in the margin stating that these fierce and deadly weapons (to which are also added a nasty razor-disk shooter and poisons) are evidence of barbarity, for it takes "great skill" to end a fight without killing.  "The Sith understand this not, as these weapons prove."  To this Tarssus replies:

> _It takes even greater skill to either kill or spare in their proper time, not bind oneself to one or the other all the time. Imperius_

On Sith amulets, the abattar, which "translates any language spoken or written, and attunes its wearer to the maddening chatter of ghosts" catches Tarssus' eye:

> _If tuned to better protect the wearer from dangerous side effects, consider the amazing potential of the abattar! Imperius_

(One need look no further than _Star Trek_ 's Universal Translator to see said potential! )

Windu finishes the Sith Amulet section with a bit of commentary, stating that "the Sith focus on collecting treasures and neglect the study of the Force.  It's one more way in which they miss the big picture."  To this Tarssus rebuts: 

> _Does one not learn through empirical study as well as through philosophy? Imperius_

Syn then states something commonly said about Sith Purebloods: that they are "natural adepts at the Dark Side," that they are, in essence, racially evil.  Thankfully _Star Wars: The Old Republic_ , where Tarssus' character comes from, allows you the chance to play Sith Purebloods with a Light alignment as well as Dark.  Being well acquainted with one of these individuals, Tarssus is not one bit impressed with Syn here.  First he points out:

> _Sith Purebloods venerated cruelty.  But I should like to see Sorzus Syn take this deterministic assertion up with Rûmaz and his late brother Ikharail. Imperius_

He's not done, though.  When Syn says in a later paragraph that "the Sith have had a thousand generations to perfect the dark arts," Tarssus is quick to pick up on the fact that the role of _culture_ is strongly implied here rather than blood and succinctly points out:

> _Oh, look!  She contradicts her own case! Imperius_

After reading about some of the new beasts Syn created on Korriban, including the terentatek, that feeds exclusively on "Force-rich blood," something about this strikes him...a resemblance to a nearly-extinct species with which he is (not always happily) well acquainted with in the person of Khem Val:

> _Could Sorzus Syn or another alchemist have created the Dashade people?  There are too many similarities to ignore.  Perhaps my suggestion to Talos of their dating all the way back to the_ [first inhabitants of Coruscant] _was wrong. Imperius_

The final comments I'll share from this section are Tarssus' remarks on the Jedi and Sith Codes.  Tarssus first manages to take issue at the exact same time with both Syn's statement that only raging anger can be the passion that begins the Sith Code, and Mace Windu's assertion in the comments that "anger may energize you, but it is an overheated, random energy that will accomplish little and leave you drained."  (Says the Jedi who was very clearly pissed off at Palpatine.)

> _Only hateful and fearful anger is random.  Righteous anger is not, if rightly quenched in the waters of compassion. Imperius_

([Quenching](http://www.deviantart.com/users/outgoing?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quenching) to a bladesmith has a very particular meaning.  It may cool the metal, but it hardens the blade.  Mess up the heat treating on a blade and it's basically FUBARed.)

Tarssus, however, agrees with Sorzus Syn's assertion that the Jedi Code confines its adherents, and that "peace, serenity, and harmony are restatements of the same thing--the passive acceptance of limitations.  The Jedi encourage this.  But passion will always defeat peace."  Not that Syn is likely to appreciate the addendum that follows the initial agreement... 

> _Jedi passivity is indeed a soul-killer.  Passion can be channeled and aimed at a right purpose; the Sith error was to use this as an excuse for base hedonism and aimless grabs at conquest. Imperius_

Oh, and Windu, in his earlier comment, states that the Jedi Code "provides purpose and direction," while asserting as I noted above, that it is absolutely impossible to do so with anger...an assertion Tarssus has now debunked in two places.


	3. The War Journal of Darth Malgus of the Second Sith Empire

The first comment I'll share is a lament from Tarssus after a comment from Luke stating that "because the Sith are never at peace, they always seek to harm others."  He is so saddened by this that he addresses Luke directly rather than in the more scholarly manner of some of his other comments:

> _You truly have no idea that some of us tried to stem the raging tide and find the way to peace...sadly, given my Empire's eventual fall, like my ancestor's long before, it is very easy to see how it would appear. Imperius_

Of course, it should be noted that by "peace," Imperius as a Sith refers to not being in an interstellar war, as opposed to stagnation.  But the fact is, that the former sort of peace, Imperius _did_ wish for and try to work for where he could, in his time. 

Unfortunately, Darth Malgus writes of a key factor that hampered such efforts.  In Malgus' case, he had a bitter rivalry with one Lord Adraas, and describes deliberately and knowingly allowing Adraas to employ a suboptimal tactic against the Republic in hopes of embarrassing him or knocking him out of the competition altogether.  Tarssus is more than familiar with this sort of mid-battle infighting, which _he_ witnessed lose the Empire a victory on Corellia despite his best efforts to prevent it and shield Imperial troops from needless losses...even as he was forced to fight for his life against another Sith.  Tarssus' comment is bitter, and the epitome of pithiness.

> _Just like Thanaton, they waste troops and resources on this stupidity_.  _Imperius_

Not even a worthy cause or a tactical miscalculation, nor even some sort of _nobly-fought_ rivalry.  Flat out _stupidity_.  Tarssus, for his part, attempted to impose a ban on this sort of activity within the Sphere of Ancient Knowledge upon his accession, forbidding Sith Lords who had a problem with each other to destroy Imperial resources (or lives) other than each other one-on-one.  Any duel violating this rule would be a Pyrrhic victory for the survivor, who would meet their death at the end of Imperius' saber, for the good of the Empire and its people.

Tarssus then takes Malgus to task for a paragraph that begins with the blunt declaration: "Politics sicken me."  But from there, Malgus goes on to whine about how a Sith Lord should not have to handle less glorious jobs like supply chain management and logistics, leaving that to non-Force-sensitive functionaries.  Clearly Tarssus' opinion is that this little rant falls below the effort needed to actually argue with it: 

> _Malgus did so well with the first sentence of that paragraph and then speeder-wrecked with great alacrity. Imperius_

Then Tarssus finds another, even more infuriating example of incredibly poor resource management--not to mention complete self-contradiction--in the very next paragraph, where Malgus writes two sentences that simply do not follow: "All aliens are slaves under the Sith Empire.  Every resource must be exploited when your cause is total victory."  This, as far as Tarssus the former (human) slave is concerned, is total BS.

> _Wrong again.  How do you know a man's true purpose if you force him to be your slave and not allow him to rise or fall on free choice?  And yes, "man" certainly means non-human too. Imperius_

But one of the most fascinating things on a page that spawned so much commentary is a comment by Vader regarding a twisted romance (see what I did there?) Malgus later describes with a Twi'lek named Eleena (whom Malgus later killed to preserve his power) that seems to capture the worst of the Jedi and the worst of the Sith all at once, revealing Vader's double indoctrination: "Attachment such as this leads to loss and tragedy."  For Tarssus, whose romantic and familial relationships are worlds more stable, there is little more to say than:

> _No, sick and lopsided obsessions do.  Not true love. Imperius_

Tarssus' next comment doesn't appear until a description by Malgus of Jedi Battle Meditation, which Malgus describes as linking warships and starfighters into "a single mind."  Our friendly neighborhood Darth is horrified.

> _Odd that the Jedi do not find such mindbending twisted. Imperius_

And now we have a commentary from Palpatine on this same page on a different subject: the "impenetrability" of Coruscant's defenses in the Galactic Empire.  Which earns this little bit from the Snark Lord of the Sith:

> _Impenetrable, unsinkable, immortal.  Famous last words. Imperius_

Darth Vader later states in a commentary, "I do not respect spies and others who hide in the shadows.  Those who wish to fight should make their intentions clear."  Tarssus...gets a little personal.

> _Was not Palpatine all of the above? Imperius_

Palpatine finally derides Sith Warriors as "animals," such as Darth Maul.  (Which is ironic since Maul would have come closer to the profile of a Sith Assassin, a variety of Inquisitor that existed in Tarssus' day alongside the Sorceror that Tarssus was.)

> _That is what happens when you indoctrinate instead of respecting a warrior enough to foster initiative and discernment to match his strength. Imperius_

Overall, unlike with Sorzus Syn's occasional descriptions of wonders that could have been more artfully harnessed and to Lighter purposes, Tarssus found little to cheer him in this section from a time he knew all too well, nor others who reflected on it.


	4. The Rule of Two: The Fridge Logic Edition?

This is one of the first works in _The Book of Sith_ to have a title page.  Imperius sets a pattern that will occur multiple times later, of starting to vent his displeasure before even getting to the body of the text: 

> _What a ghastly error!  Two utterly cultish, fanatical beings freezing the Sith in the worst aspect of our ways until, it seemed, forever.  Fortunately the way is now open for the establishment of a livelier and healthier order.  Some command and control is necessary, but so is the encouragement of open debate and inquiry--the chance to try new approaches and learn firsthand what works when compared side by side to the old.  Let this Rule be noted for its foolishness, but discarded for the future. Imperius_

Bane begins by laying out the belief that the more Sith there are, the more the power of the Dark Side is "diluted," and that when each Sith becomes convinced they are the brightest star, around which all others must orbit, infighting begins, leading to Jedi victory.  He believes that one Sith can carry the full power of the Dark Side, and that sharing power is weakness and a violation of the Sith Code.  Despite having witnessed such infighting up close and personal, to his eternal disgust, Tarssus calls Bane out on the inherent ridiculousness of this on multiple fronts.

>  _This is utter foolishness!  The Force is an element of nature so vast as to be utterly impervious to dilution, and furthermore, darkness does not flow from without to within--but completely the reverse!  Bane carries out an act of incredible self-deception here, and took everything that troubled us in my time and set it on a course of exponential multiplication. Imperius_

In another section, Darth Bane offers his perspective on the "Darth" title, and states that "It is a title of power.  It carries authority and is crowned by the judgment of history.  It symbolizes transformation.  When I took Darth as my title, I put away my childhood name.  What does it matter that I was once a miner or a soldier?  The only thing that matters is what I will achieve."  For Darth Imperius, however--even though his name and title made him what Lord Aloysius describes as "the standard-bearer for the people of the Empire," he took a very different perspective than Bane and those who followed him...which is not surprising since some in his time held the title but combined it with their birth name.

>  _I felt the judgment of history, yes.  And I had the power to define myself by my achievements...but I bore all of my names as parts of the composite that is me.  Whichever I sign, the others are implied. Imperius_

(Yes, Tarssus momentarily forgot that as a spirit, he can't pick up a pen in the mortal world.  The amanuensis writing all of this down for him recorded the little slip-up as is, and was polite enough not to point it out. )

Though Darth Imperius was the name he signed on formal documents and used with certain people, to those with whom he was close, he remained Tarssus Kallig as well.  And when he later became the Outlander to many in the faraway reaches of the galaxy, he accepted this too as yet another part of him.  Tarssus found a moment of levity when Luke commented later in that section that the title of "Darth" ended with Anakin Skywalker and that he was proud his family was the one that put an end to it.  Our friendly neighborhood Force-ghost had this to say: 

> _And then I appeared.  Oops? Imperius_

Darth Bane later says that one can most easily mold the young into the type of Sith apprentice one seeks.  Luke asserts (in what seems to be a potential major error on his part IMO) that early training was thus the cornerstone of the Jedi Order to teach children to care for others instead of themselves.  Tarssus Kallig, who (like Luke himself!) did not start training until much later--19, in his case--takes issue with this idea.

>  _Why does early training mean denial of family?  They are the firmament of the heart. Imperius_

Then we enter the personal combat training section, and Tarssus Kallig really pulls out the [Fridge Logic](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FridgeLogic).  The Sith of Bane's Rule of Two are supposed to be elite warriors yet keep their very existence a secret at the same time...waaaaait a minute.

>  _And exactly how did Bane manage to keep his Sith from atrophying in skill yet hardly ever match their skills against the unknown?  Clearly Palpatine proved a capable duelist, and perhaps some who renounced the Jedi brought fresh knowledge, but I remain astounded that such a dearth of practical experience survived as it did.  It certainly suggests Jedi complacency was the only way any of this could have succeeded--the missing second half of the equation. Imperius_

As Bane moves into lightsaber combat, he suggests that compared to the Jedi's six forms, that a Sith should only study those forms that channel aggression.  Furthermore, "A battle should end quickly.  At every moment, one should be assessing the ways to dispatch one's opponent--select the most direct method."  For once, Tarssus is willing to allow that Bane is at least _partly_ right.

>  _One should understand and be able to employ other tactics situationally.  But for once, Bane is somewhat right: swiftness in ending a battle is much to be aspired to.  Swiftness is even mercy; so, at the right time, is death as opposed to cruel torture or leaving one to linger or to rise to cause pain again. Imperius_

One wonders what would have happened if Obi-Wan Kenobi had chosen differently on Mustafar...and on a related note, Tarssus then notices a comment by Quinlan Vos, where Vos claims, "With the Sith, everything is overkill.  There's no need for the killing.  When I knock somebody down, they stay down."  Of course, the Snark Lord of the Sith can't help but notice what's wrong with _that_ picture...

>  _If you do not kill when required--does your foe not in fact get up again later--not "stay down"? Imperius_

And in a related vein, Luke comments that "knocking down one's opponent is always better than injuring them."  Which earns this remark:

>  _Oh, dear, Luke...usually so levelheaded.  But "always"?  Only Jedi deal in absolutes? Imperius_

Tarssus shows further confusion at Darth Bane's suggestion that offense techniques such as Force Push, Crush, Inertia, Blind, and Throw are somehow inherently Dark (perhaps because Bane has carried forward the Jedi Order's error?).

>  _If employed appropriately, how can these be classified as evil?  Offense is at the right moment a necessity. Imperius_

And when it comes to Force lightning...well, Palpatine may have ended up being the most _powerful_ user of lightning ever, but those of you who have read Tarssus' stories will realize that there are things Tarssus Kallig shows the ability to do with _his_ lightning that almost no Sith accomplished before or after.

>  _My own lightning could be fueled by wrath at certain times, but I found all deep passions could fuel it.  Unfortunately what I knew seems to have hardly survived me, though I have heard a rumor of something a rare few Jedi call Electric Judgment. Imperius_

In the Legends works, there were examples of Jedi who discovered a form of lightning, which tended to manifest in different colors than the typical Sith lightning.  They believed it to be a separate power--but to Tarssus Kallig, these are in fact multiple forms of the _same_ energy-channeling power.

Luke then adds in a comment regarding Force lightning and other typically Dark Side uses of power: "Sith tactics do as much harm to the user as to the victim.  The Dark Side corrupts everything it touches.  It's hard to understand why people who know this choose this path anyway."  Has Luke forgotten the history he's just read in some of the other sections?  Imperius offers a reminder. 

> _I was raised in the Sith Empire; this was the path available, but I made far better of it than most after my Empire now know.  Imperius_

Oddly, another power shows up in Bane's list of "Dark Side" mental powers...and this one, because it did not require reaching into the mind of another, was the only one on the list that Tarssus Kallig, with his clouded Force-sense, was capable of using: and this was the technique to detach one's mind from physical pain and thus resist torture and the pain of injury.  Quinlan Vos rightly notes this oddity--for he was taught to do this by his Jedi master!  Tarssus concurs, as you might expect:

>  _Quinlan, I would suggest it is instinctive.  Non-Force-sensitives are capable of a related discipline.  I learned to suppress pain as a child by brute necessity when the overseers would punish me.  It is not "dark."  It is fundamental. Imperius_

At a few points in my life, I have found I could dull pain by meditation, and I most certainly don't have the Force!  Tarssus is more aware than the average Sith (or Jedi, for that matter) of what non-Force-sensitives can do.


	5. Mother Talzin Gets Schooled by a Spirit

**Notes for the Chapter:**

>  **A request: Please be mature in the comments to these next two commentaries. Religious matters will be dealt with because of the hard stances that are represented in these two sections of The Book of Sith, and my character, Tarssus Kallig, is going to have an opinion too, and express it very decisively.** I understand that you guys have your own views both on how you interpret the Force in Star Wars canon, and how you believe in your real lives. This is not intended as an attack on anyone; I am NOT having a go at anybody. While anyone who knows me knows where I stand and should not be surprised by the way things go, please understand that I am not denying anyone a right to their opinion, any more than I want to be denied the right to my own. That said, NO flamewars here, regardless of whether aimed at me or others.

As with Bane's Rule of Two, Tarssus didn't even get past the title page before starting to vent his problems with the original text... 

>   
>  _This text is even more filled with error than Bane's, amazingly enough.  It is reasonable to suspect that there is something beyond the Force, which is of nature--something_ greater _than nature.  But something tells me that Talzin's "magick" and its mythology make but gross mockeries of anything truly worthy of being beyond Force and nature.  A few points of interest may be available here, but only with intense caution, critical thinking, and inner discernment. Imperius_

Tarssus does begin, at least, by raising such a "point of interest."  Mother Talzin begins by expounding upon the virtues of Dathomiri heritage for her Nightsisters, and encouraging them to remember said heritage.

>  _One thing is wise here: allowing those who wield the Force to have a meaningful heritage instead of stripping it away as the Jedi do. Imperius_

But then Talzin lets rip her first of many illogical statements: "Among the galaxy's many species you will encounter numerous beliefs, nearly all of them claiming to be the one true belief.  Not all of these contradictory ways can be true; it follows therefore that NONE are true."  Uh...no.  Just...I don't even know what logical fallacy that is, specifically.  I just know that it IS a big glaring one.  And so does Tarssus.

>  _This is complete illogic.  Only one truth exists in the universe even if we have a hard time grasping it all. Imperius_

In other words, even if not everybody is 100% right, there IS a truth, and one can be objectively nearer or further from it.  We should always be humbled by this fact, and mindful that we in our finite selves should question our logic and our measuring tools, but the only other option is a mindless type of relativism that ultimately collapses into nonsense, contradiction, and at the worst, solipsism or nihilism.  But, until we gain a more perfect knowledge than our mortal condition allows, we must do our best to estimate that truth and not shy away because we ARE estimating.  You'll definitely see that theme again, in a surprising way.

The next account touches Tarssus in a deep way, for Talzin describes nearly dying in childbirth.  Tarssus' mother actually did die in childbirth, and Tarssus was technically stillborn but thankfully removed and revived before permanent damage could occur.  This drastically altered the nature of Tarssus' connection to the Force.  (Would have LOVED to see him school Talzin given the views of men she later revealed...)  For Talzin, the effects of her experience were profound too--she swore herself to become the "conduit" of the spirits that she encountered.  That said, although Tarssus was touched at first (and yes, he would say he might be "touched," too ), he was _not_ uncritical of what he read.

> _Interesting account.  It seems Talzin may have been pulled into the other world as I was...but it was a terrible and dangerous thing of her to bind herself in the service of beings that move within the Force, to subject herself to something no greater and perhaps worse than a living master.  Imperius_

Talzin then goes on to say that her writings are not merely her own words but those of the spirits: "Challenge my authority and you challenge life itself!"  Tarssus has heard _this_ song before, and killed the Darth who had formed a cult and exploited its people: 

> _Words of a cruel cult master, like Palladius. Imperius_

Tarssus then has a go at Talzin a few more times for illogic.  It starts as moral relativism, where Talzin asks a question that seems logical: would one have predator animals starve in order to have the bloodless utopia the Jedi seek?  She uses this question to undermine the existence of the Light and Dark altogether.

>  _She is right that all things have place and time, but refuses thorough discernment. Imperius_

Ironically, in the comments, we get a crazy case of agreement between THE last two commenters you'd expect to find common cause: Luke Skywalker and Sheev Palpatine!  Luke points out that while there is death in nature, there is balance.  Palpatine then points out that Talzin's Nightsisters never gained power because of refusing to "commit to a single path.  By refusing to name the Dark Side, they could not give themselves to it utterly and could never gain true power."  While Tarssus has his own take on the right way to gain true power, and what side to follow, he ends up finding common cause with both of his fellow commenters!

>  _Strange and fitting to see Luke and Palpatine in agreement here.  Refusal to discern and thus hold firm in convictions is indeed weakness.  There is Light and Dark, though they exist separate of the Force, which is embedded in nature.  They well forth from us according to our choices.  Imperius_

Talzin then addresses a claim that most of the followers of the rogue Jedi Allya, who started teaching "magick" on Dathomir, recanted her amorality on her deathbed and admitted to the existence of good and evil.  Talzin's ancestors, who rejected the "altered" text were exiled and then formed the Nightsisters.

>  _Sometimes death brings clarity.  Perhaps it did for Allya, if she existed. Imperius_

Then Talzin gets into her sexism, which she uses to isolate, confine, and control men.  She justifies this by claiming men are "simpler" and less able to handle the dualistic spirits she believes in.  Tarssus is having none of that...and not _just_ because he is male.

>  _I would call "simple" anyone who thinks they can categorize by physical traits alone.  While distribution of one gift or another may not always be even, they should be sought and honored without groundless prejudice where found. Imperius_

Talzin next expounds on divination (i.e. telling the future), something Luke points out is fraught with uncertainty and danger because the future is always changing and people have the power to control their own destinies.  Tarssus concurs.

>  _Luke is correct: we can in fact control and live with the unknown far more adeptly than with the illusion of a static fate.  To do less is to spit upon the free will with which we are endowed. Imperius_

As we've seen with Anakin, believing in what Imperius calls a "static fate" can lead to the worst sorts of self-fulfilling prophecies.

Talzin then describes a Dark Side ritual that causes spirits to mass into a horde and attack a target...something she does by calling upon a "Winged Goddess."  Tarssus, who bound Force-spirits during his lifetime, and now IS a Force-ghost himself, has something to say about this. 

> _I can envision how this would be done--but it is incredibly dangerous to award finite beings with this level of reverence and submission, as it is with the living.  Death brings change, but retention of identity by definition implies finiteness if we speak of personalities as we know in our realm.  Do not submit to such beings, no matter what is promised.  Do not award them power beyond their scope, but assert oneself as equal. Imperius._

In other words, if you were to see him as a Force-ghost, Tarssus would not want to be worshipped.  He would want to be dealt with as a person, no more, and no less.  Of course, Tarssus Kallig is a _good_ ghost.  With others, who are very much NOT good, ceding control to them would be very dangerous indeed.  Tarssus himself nearly lost his mind to the four ghosts he bound and that was with _them_ serving _him_ as opposed to the way Talzin is doing it.

But before revisiting this theme again, Tarssus finds a fascinating little tidbit: the power of communication with animals.  If you remember his reaction to Sorzus Syn's abbatar, this shouldn't be surprising.  Our friendly Inquisitor does put the "inquiry" in Inquisitor, and this would be another means for him to do so! 

> _Communication with animals seems worthy of investigation. Imperius_

After reading a description of the two deities the Nightsisters worship, though...Tarssus realizes something.  Before Allya came to Dathomir, another, prior visiting group is mentioned: Sith.  That gives Tarssus an epiphany that is just as potentially illuminating as it is disturbing, if he is right:

>  _If I had to hazard a guess, I would say that the Nightsisters' ancestors foolishly bargained with a pair of the deceased...perhaps even two Sith (Talzin attests to a Sith presence) who chose to repeat our ancestors' subjugation of the Purebloods from beyond the grave and claim for themselves immortality through eternal worship.  If deity truly embodied itself through comprehensible form and language, I should expect there to be clear evidence of greater identity and greater Light contained temporarily in the lesser rather than the lesser defining (or attempting to define) the greater as these amoral symbols do.  Beware of such deceptions always--let this stand as a warning. Imperius_

In other words, all that these potential Sith spirits do is mirror sentients in their flaws and foibles--and thus are not worthy of worship as anything superior merely because they are powerful--rather than actually demonstrating anything _higher_ about them than mortal nature and thus worthy of worship.

Well...after that, we at least get another moment of fascination from Tarssus when he reads of a Talisman of Transformation, that would allow one to temporarily take the form and mindset of an animal.

> _As with the abbatar, the potential for study and heightened empathy for the unlike is astonishing. Imperius_

While it would not give one the experience of a sentient nonhuman, it _would_ give the experience of having different senses and instincts, and Tarssus seems to think that experiencing these other forms and windows upon the world might increase sympathy for animals and for sentients unlike oneself alike.  But it's possible to go too far with such connections to nature.  The Talisman of Transformation is something that a sentient being takes by choice into himself.  Two other talismans--one of Familiars, which calls animals to serve a person, and of Resurrection (which apparently does exactly what it says, even if the body is no longer in good condition)--end up appalling Tarssus in a major way.  (And remember, for the latter, this is a Force-ghost speaking!) 

> _I greatly dislike the fact that the Totems of Familiars would seem to enslave a creature who cannot even comprehend or try to formulate an escape.  Far better to communicate, even emulate, and earn freely-given favor.  And I cannot understate the cruelty, except in cases where revival by medical means to a body that can truly live, is still possible, of attempting to force reconnection to a body with which reuniting could only bring indescribable suffering.  When it was my time, I moved on as I ought to.  My return from the birthing trauma was only right because my body had not yet lost its fitness for full life.  The use of such a talisman should be scorned except--perhaps, and even then I am most ill at ease--under the supervision of a qualified science-based physician and the family of the dying. Imperius_

Tarssus' next comment pertains to one by Luke after a comment by Talzin of what befalls a creature after it is killed.  Luke says: "To kill another intelligent being is to override his or her will, and it should only be done when there's no other choice.  The fate of a spirit should have no bearing on our decisions in the here and now."

>  _The fate of a spirit ought to have bearing...as an influence to compassion.  As for the overriding of will, I place this crime above murder: the pain of the body passes, but that of the spirit never fully does so.  Better to allow death than subvert the mind. Imperius_

Tarssus then offers thoughts on another set of powers Talzin describes that strikes him as inspired--but not in the way Talzin thinks.  Talzin believes she is calling on animals to allow for powers similar to theirs.

>  _I am not so sure that this is invocation of a spirit, but rather taking wisdom from the possibilities nature allows us to observe, that exist beyond our particular species.  Never cease to question and imagine as a child does. Imperius_

In the end, after Talzin describes making her Nightsisters into mercenaries whose services are sold to the highest bidder regardless of what that bidder wants, Tarssus leaves his concluding words on the entire reading:

>  _I must conclude that amorality is a form of inner darkness.  Failure to call good and evil, Light and Dark, by name, is cowardice and by default gives us over to darkness by pure mindlessness.  We will never understand where Light and life come from if we mistake nature for source or the existence of a thing for a statement against morality.  Because a thing can be done, should we fail to ask ourselves when or if it should be?  In this respect, the Jedi have the right of it even though they go to the opposite extreme of being so blinded by rigid dogma that they too refuse open-eyed discernment as a Sith of our way accepts. Imperius_

The next section will offer some interesting reflections from our friendly neighborhood Force-ghost as well, not only for the irony of a Force-ghost offering up his commentary on the subject matter (as with this one!) but because it's at pretty much the opposite extreme from Talzin philosophically.


	6. Darth Plagueis: If God Is Dead, Then Everything Is Permitted

**Notes for the Chapter:**

>  **A request: Please be mature in the comments to this commentaries. Religious matters will be dealt with because of the hard stances that are represented in this and the previous section of The Book of Sith, and my character, Tarssus Kallig, is going to have an opinion too, and express it very decisively.** I understand that you guys have your own views both on how you interpret the Force in Star Wars canon, and how you believe in your real lives. This is not intended as an attack on anyone; I am NOT having a go at anybody. While anyone who knows me knows where I stand and should not be surprised by the way things go, please understand that I am not denying anyone a right to their opinion, any more than I want to be denied the right to my own. That said, NO flamewars here, regardless of whether aimed at me or others.

Tarssus' opening comment offers the foundation of the approach he will take to the rest of Darth Plagueis' text.  Plagueis states that life arises from the natural phenomenon that is the Force:

> _The Force is certainly intertwined with physical life.  But Plagueis, rational though he is, seems to confound natural Force with the will I am growing convinced exists above it.  Imperius_

Nature, in effect, ends up deified in Plagueis' philosophy just as surely as it did with Talzin's--except that where Talzin saw a spirit in _everything_ , Plagueis saw a spirit in _nothing_ and in effect deified what he viewed as blind chance.  Plagueis points out, "The galaxy's leading scientific minds are largely ignorant of the Force, and the galaxy's most skilled Force-users reject science.  The latter are caught up in romantic mysticism, convinced they have been called by a higher power.  The former have no excuse."  You can almost see Tarssus facepalming as he dictates the following:

> _I applaud rationalism, but Plagueis establishes a false dichotomy. Imperius_

He follows up on this by adding in response to Plagueis' remark that "the Sith of old never asked these questions" about why things worked, "for tradition and obedience extinguished their spark of curiosity."  Clearly Darth Plagueis had no idea about Tarssus Kallig's unquenchable spirit of inquiry (on the light side) or the hideous experimentation of people like Lord Grathan on the Dark Side.

> _Curiosity and reverence can in fact exist harmoniously.  Imperius_

In other words, there is no reason to act as if science and faith are opposing forces, where one must defeat the other in some sort of holy crusade (and yes, I apply that term to both sides).

Plagueis then states his goal: to learn to manipulate life to the point where he can create new life and then sustain his own indefinitely and live forever.  Things start getting interesting when the dead (i.e. Tarssus) start talking back and we get one of the first reflections in this section upon his own state:

> _You cannot truly find comfort in eternal binding to the brokenness of the mortal world.  That is why it is in our nature to die and accept that our eternity will be different, not a continuance of what is familiar by routine. Imperius_

Plagueis then goes into the in-universe science behind the midichlorians.  I know some fans hated that whole theory and wish it would die in a fire, but I personally found the whole concept utterly fascinating and in no way cheapening the Star Wars universe.  Just more for my mind to chew on.  As for Tarssus, he points something out about these studies: that no matter how much you discover, the more there is to _keep_ discovering, and the fact that you can never get rid of the ultimate version of the question, _WHY?_

> _Plagueis' contribution is to recognize the truth that the Force is on par with any other natural law and not beyond that.  But that fails to answer the question of how this tapestry of laws and constants was woven together.  Imperius_

So if it's not the Force that has a will, that put everything together...then what _did_?

Luke calls out Plagueis' focus on midichlorians as misguided and states that "they are a natural lesson in symbiosis.  When we listen to the smallest creatures, they open us to the expanse of the Force.  Only a Sith would seek to dismantle a relationship that benefits both parties."  While I don't think Tarssus disagrees with the fact that such a lesson can be observed (remember what he said in Talzin's section about "taking wisdom from the possibilities nature allows us to observe" and never ceasing to "question and imagine as a child does"?), he addresses Luke personally with his rebuttal to the last assertion: 

> _Luke, the old Jedi sought to divorce cold doctrine from vital passion.  How does that differ? Imperius_

Plagueis describes what he believes is a "unified consciousness" among the midichlorians and states that they "can be influenced by the host's mental state.  In particular, negative emotions such as the loss of hope can induce cellular necrosis."  To this Tarssus responds:

> _Death of a broken heart has been known since the dawn of time.  Plagueis proves my contention that our Darkness or Light goes into the Force and not the reverse.  Imperius_

To Plagueis' contention that the midicholorians themselves contain such a unified consciousness, well...Tarssus delves deep into his own theories.  (I could expound far, FAR more on this, but this will give you just a tiny taste.)

> _I do not see the midichlorians as the cause of will, nor the Force that we wield.  Rather, they seem to behave more as quanta than ordinary creatures, and thus as the quanta in the nonliving provide a vector for will, they are a vector for will above them rather than its originator.  The painting does not create the artist; it is the reverse. Imperius_

(Quanta, to put it in simple terms, are the simplest packets of matter/energy--let's call it "information"--that can exist in the universe.  They behave very differently than larger conglomerations of matter.  While these larger conglomerations--such as stars, planets, or our own bodies--operate in a very predictable manner, currently best described by Einstein's theory of relativity, everything about quanta comes down to probability and "common-sense" precepts such as "an object cannot exist in two places or states at once" break down.  So too do causality or the effects of distance, on that tiny scale; see quantum entanglement.  Seems like an interesting potential vector for deity to act, doesn't it?  Or even, on a lesser scale, our own spirits?)

Tarssus then points out a problem in one of Plagueis' statements, specifically the claim that he could bring about "new life where none existed."  Tarssus takes issue with the use of the word "create" to describe this act. 

> _You did not create life, Plagueis.  You merely used cells and midichlorians already imbued with life before you. Imperius_

In other words, all Plagueis is doing is shaping existing matter and energy in new ways...no different, in the end, from any of Sorzus Syn's experiments.  Plagueis did not introduce new matter or energy into the universe--only use existing materials.  To do anything other than that was beyond him.  (This, incidentally, is my comment should there ever be a success with the Miller-Urey experiment IRL, or any of its successors: so what, it's just existing elements.  Big whoop.)

The next comment is directed at Luke's remarks when he read Plagueis' account of creating life, specifically life with incredibly high midichlorian counts.  Needless to say, the likely applicability of this to his father doesn't escape him.  To this Tarssus comments: 

> _Luke and ultimately Vader prove biology is not destiny. Imperius_

In other words, Plagueis may have done what he did from the materialistic standpoint, but he and even Palpatine, with all his machinations, were fundamentally unable to control for free will: the ability of the spirit to override the material.

Tarssus next addresses Plagueis' "philosophy of life," which is essentially a treatise on immortality and who deserves it.  Plagueis makes a comment that the Snark Lord of the Sith can't help but respond to.  (And while funny, it also implies a position he believes _every_ mortal being should take, one that harkens back to his other comments so far about his own ghostly state and how he feels about that.)  Plagueis says, "I do not wish to live in a galaxy where any fool can perpetuate his ignorance for eternity." 

> _Including myself!  I stepped aside when it came time. Imperius_

Regardless of how his death came about (which he isn't telling right now), he seems to view it regardless as "time."  Then he notices Luke offering up a similar comment: "No one wants to die.  But this obsession with extending life is selfish.  We all have our time.  Nothing good comes from trying to cheat it."  Tarssus' response is simple enough:

> _This Sith, at least, concurs, Luke. Imperius_

Plagueis describes other possibilities in the Force, including using it to fold time and space, essentially creating Einstein-Rosen Bridges, or as they are popularly known, wormholes.  Plagueis states that "such a thing would permit the study of all knowledge through history, even the secrets recorded in the long-lost Library of Silversisi."  Although Tarssus did not comment on whether or not this power should be pursued in the mortal world, he has this to offer about his own current experience:

> _And all Plagueis in actuality needed to do to experience instantaneous transportation and exploration was to simply allow death in its right time.  Horak-mul was right: so much to see and learn!  I can accept even the loss of writing for myself, in the mortal realm, for this.  It is different but not to be feared or loathed. Imperius_

That had to have been a big adjustment in mindset to Imperius, not to be able to manipulate things in the mortal world as he once did, and thus pass on most of his new learning and observations to others (except by the method he is using with _The Book of Sith_ , of dictating notes to a Force-sensitive who is capable of seeing and hearing him)--but he is taking plenty of advantage of the opportunities he has to grow his knowledge not because of what he might do in our world, but the sheer joy of the learning and the knowing itself.

Plagueis claims that the afterlife is a lie and a fable, and he thinks that the patterns of the mind degrade almost instantly if not anchored to a biological form.  The next comment is nothing other than a pure Snark Lord of the Sith moment--not hard to picture his face when he dictated this in response to Luke's response to this proving the existence of Force-ghosts: "I've seen Yoda, Ben, and my father return from death.  The Force is a welcoming place, far larger than Plagueis' attempts to measure and minimize it." 

> _Hi, Luke! Imperius_

Plagueis then makes the assertion, commonly seen in the Star Wars universe (and with fans too!) that the non-Force-sensitive and even most Force-sensitives do not retain awareness after death.  Tarssus counters with this: 

> _Plagueis had no basis to claim the non-Force-sensitive and others did not maintain identity; he could only have honestly justified a statement that they cannot manifest to the living as a general rule.  Imperius_

Tarssus is well aware that just as his ancestor Lord Aloysius could not prove to him that the non-Force-sensitive survive meaningfully past death, _he_ cannot prove this to anyone who reads his words.  He can, however, warn them against making too many leaps based on too little evidence.  He expounds on this further, saying:

> _Pure rationalists believe they must dismiss what they cannot prove, but they err to believe that the only viable conclusion is nonexistence. Imperius_

In other words, you should recognize that the scientific method will not work for certain things, and not try to claim that you CAN use science to prove those things (or warp scientific theory).  But you should also not claim that [non-falsifiability](http://www.deviantart.com/users/outgoing?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-falsifiable) equates to non-existence.  One should neither create pseudoscience, nor dismiss faith that acknowledges itself to _be_ faith and not science.

Then Plagueis starts commenting on the spirits of dead Sith Lords.  Oh, boy, you can bet Tarssus is now paying even _more_ attention than he was before!  Plagueis thinks that these stories are generally false, and that the one apparition he witness that he thinks MIGHT have had something to it: the spirit of Marka Ragnos, furious at Plagueis' plans to dismantle the traditions of Korriban.  (One would at first wonder if Ragnos had to tell Tarssus to get behind him and take a number... )  Ragnos, however, did not answer Plagueis' questions or scientific inquiries, so Plagueis suspects the whole thing just played out in his head.

And we get one of those other fun instances of Luke and Palpatine agreeing in their comments that Sith spirits DO exist, though as Palpatine rightly notes (for most cases! ) that they are "evasive in their speech and are ultimately treacherous."  Our friendly neighborhood Sith Force-ghost, of course, can't help adding to this little "dialogue": 

> _Why would I, for one, have favored Plagueis with this level of direct dialogue, however he craved it?  I knew better! Imperius_

Obviously the sweetest Sith Lord of them all isn't the treacherous type, and he is engaging his amanuensis in direct dialogue (not to mention anyone else who is in the room, and anyone reading his comments).  Pardon my French, but Plagueis should be reeling from that little bitch-slap from beyond the grave! 

Plagueis then describes his plan to use the prophecy of the Chosen One/Sith'ari to manipulate the Jedi and lead to their downfall.  While we know that the Jedi _were_ just about eliminated, Imperius comments on the reason for the ultimate failure of Plagueis' idea: the fact that Plagueis was so sure that this artificial Chosen One would be an agent of his will.  In the last minutes, of course, that proved untrue.

> _To fashion the body of a being with fully free will renders the sort of control Plagueis envisions impossible. Imperius_

Tarssus then offers a comment to Luke, who states that "Plagueis made the mistake of believing that if something isn't literally true, then it has no value.  I don't know the Jedi legends well, but the balance of the Force is a subject to be studied, not dismissed."

> _Though I differ on certain philosophical points with Luke, he is correct that neither physical nor spiritual should be dismissed.  Where there is no conscience, in the end there is no meaning, only dead and drifting matter. Imperius_

Plagueis concludes by saying that he saw himself as in a way becoming the Sith'ari by "freeing" the Sith from symbols, mysticism, traditions, and philosophy, and thus as the Sith'ari becoming a being with ALL of his chains broken, and free from restrictions, as the prophecy states.

Or as Ivan Karamazov stated in Fyodor Dostoyevsky's _The Brothers Karamazov_ , "If God is dead, then everything is permitted."

Tarssus offers his own conclusion to Plagueis' section, leaving with this: 

> _The mind of Plagueis was an inquisitive one, but the failure was a fatal combination of rationalized preconceptions and a belief that science was its own religion that--not unlike Talzin's own amorality ironically enough!--allowed total disregard for the implications of both means and ends.  These notes are invaluable but never forget the horrifying cost with which this knowledge was bought.  I destroyed the works of Lord Grathan for this in my time.  As for myself...I hold no regrets in transiting through mortality.  Let that stand both as a warning, and a call to take heart: for none of what Plagueis did was ever necessary.  Nor do I wish that for me, it had been fulfilled. Imperius_


	7. Absolute Power for a Femtosecond: The Seven Habits of Highly Ineffective Sith Lords

**Notes for the Chapter:**

>  **A request: First, thank you for making it this far, to the last commentary on The Book of Sith! This last section is written by Palpatine...and where there's Palpatine, there's politics. Unfortunately because politics have gotten SO heated, please NO modern examples in the comments.** I know it's the reverse for a lot of people, but for me, politics is the more heated subject than religion. Let's avoid the last 25 years or so. (In-universe or other fictional examples, however, are OK.) And of course, flaming isn't cool no matter what time period you're talking about, so keep it respectful.

As with "The Rule of Two" and "Wild Power," the Snark Lord of the Sith gets right to work on the title before he goes anywhere else.  Definitely one of those moments that shows that he is both Light and Sith. 

"Absolute Power..." 

> _...for a brief instant and not even that! Imperius, standard-bearer for the people of an Empire flawed and hurting but better than yours!_

Palpatine scribbles a note on the title page twenty years after writing his original treatise, where he comments that he is still "bound by the incompetence of others.  I trust that my commanders will stifle dissent, but frequently it grows louder.  Had I not foreseen my eternal triumph I might be troubled."

> _His own lack of omnipotence and omniscience should have stood as a warning against the futility of his attempt at self-deification. Imperius_

Palpatine begins by classifying all others as weak, and the weak, he states, cannot understand the Force and therefore manipulating them is both simple and fair game.  Tarssus takes issue with that.

> _If people like my brother Talos have taught me anything about non-Force-wielders, it is that it takes anything but weakness to accurately assess the scope of their abilities and yet marshal them to astounding, skilled, and brave effect. Imperius_

Palpatine then describes how to prey on the fear of those he designates as weak in order to dominate them, and make them fear their neighbors, who might be inclined to turn them in if they slip up, and that will drive them to ostentatious displays of loyalty to the Empire.  The situation sounds very much like everything I've read about the Soviet Union under Josef Stalin.  (Yes, it is very long, but I highly recommend the nonfiction trilogy _The Gulag Archipelago_ by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn for a detailed look at that time period and the horrors that Stalin committed on his own people.)

> _Even my own people's Empire lasted longer--it is not coincidental that even in its own harshness, it allowed more room for life and sanctity of mind than this. Imperius_

The next section of Palpatine's work describes how he orchestrated the Separatist movement, the Clone Wars, and from there, Order 66--something which, revealed to the public even years later, would likely be a massive bombshell.  Of course, one of the problems that can occur is the possibility of an equal but opposite backlash from the public on those who do _not_ have it coming like Palpatine did.  Paranoia dies hard, and it is very possible that level of sustained distrust and anxiety could be spun in plenty of other directions.

> _I hope the revelation of this abuse does not lead to a permanent and equally destructive fear.  Order and chaos, I learned, both need to exist side by side, not solely one or the other.  That will bring true healing. Imperius_

In other words, you need latitude for freedom, but anarchy, complacency, or intentional weakness/pacifism aren't the answer either.  In fact, it seems the New Republic, which was so fearful of becoming the Empire again that they didn't even maintain a standing army, really DID put itself into a vulnerable position through exactly the sort of opposite fear Tarssus points out.  The New Republic seems to have been about as effective as the Thirteen Colonies were under the[ Articles of Confederation](http://www.deviantart.com/users/outgoing?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Confederation)...i.e. hanging on by the skin of its teeth.

Tarssus builds on this a bit when Palpatine describes the need to keep up a powerful army to discourage challenges from any part of the Empire. 

> _Palpatine does call one valid point to mind: even after war, one must present a strong and credible threat--but not let that be an excuse to wield it abusively or indiscriminately.  But the deterrent should not be despised solely for existing as though that itself were evil.  Imperius_

In other words, whatever wishful thinking we have, we can't plan on a utopia.  Evil will always exist and it will always rise up, and much as idealists would like to think otherwise, sometimes a bully really does need a good punch in the teeth (or a VERY good reason to think one is coming) to get the point across that their BS won't be tolerated.  As Robert A. Heinlein said, "An armed society is a polite society.  Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."  This is where the Sith are far more practical than the Jedi.  While the Sith do have their own blind spots, they seem much less likely to ignore threats and let them fester.  The thing is, there has to be an understanding that deterrence isn't the same as thuggery.  Thugs...well, let's just say THEY aren't exactly polite, so that's not what Tarssus (or Heinlein) mean here.

When Palpatine talks about the Death Star, Tarssus then comments about a superweapon from his own Empire, the Silencer, which was used to take out multiple Republic capital ships at once. 

> _The Death Star was hideously indiscriminate.  Even my Silencer was only aimed at military targets and though the necessity to use the Silencer must always be mourned, I drew at least some solace from knowing that I did not murder innocent civilians, and that at least Republic soldiers were all volunteers and chose the danger, rather than terrorized conscripts as some in the Empire of my day were.  Imperius_

Palpatine then begins describing the forms of deception he employed to win.  The galaxy once venerated the Jedi; now, they fear them because of the "assassination attempt" that an "ordinary Senator from Naboo" survived.  This leads Tarssus on a train of thought regarding how the path forward might look:

> _Venerating Force-wielders or other_ [mortal/limited] _beings is indeed an error.  But the way to bring understanding is for the two to work fully side-by-side, and in respect of each other's equally worthy gifts. Imperius_

Which was, of course, how Tarssus tried to treat innocents that he encountered in his travels.

Palpatine next talks about how he and other Sith of the Rule of Two put on false personae and used those to manipulate others.  He specifically points out that "all beings want to make sense of their reality, but none of them wish to think too deeply.  They gravitate towards words that confirm their existing suspicions."  And none more so than the Jedi, who were thoroughly "convinced of their superior insight" and therefore the easiest to deceive.  While Palpatine, of course, was a psychopath, that doesn't take away from the fact that in this case, he is absolutely telling the truth, not just in the _Star Wars_ universe, but in ours as well: it's called [confirmation bias](http://www.deviantart.com/users/outgoing?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias), and we all need to be on the lookout for it in ourselves. 

> _We should take these warnings of psychological frailty very seriously.  But by teaching of these threats, their origins, and examples, we grow awareness and a chance of engaging critical thought to evade them. Imperius_

This is, in fact, true in real life.  For example, exposing people to an understanding of what groupthink is (such as its roles in the _Challenger_ and _Columbia_ disasters), and explaining how these crippling psychological phenomena work and what the warning signs look like and what can be done to stop them, can increase the chances of someone putting on the brakes before it gets too far.  True, even with an education we still sometimes get snookered, but Tarssus is right: growing awareness DOES give us a chance.

Tarssus' next comment addresses a remark by Luke: "Palpatine's propagandists worked so well that many people during the dark times believed the Jedi were a myth." 

> _Where hardcopy records are the province of the few, versus mutable data, the risk is even greater of erasing knowledge. Imperius_

Palpatine then describes his prowess with the Force lightning, including the ability to generate Force storms.  Amazingly enough, the Light Sith Tarssus Kallig was extremely accomplished in this art as well--more so, depending on how you look at it. 

> _Palpatine learned to channel a high degree of power (Rakata enhancements?) but never mastered the ability to channel other passions besides anger, and thus he restricted and ultimately crippled himself, whereas I did not suffer such degradation.  Nor did Palpatine learn precision or grace. Imperius_

I'm pretty sure nobody out there could--or wants to--imagine Darth Sidious _dancing_ with Force lightning the way Tarssus did sometimes! 

Palpatine then speaks about the deliberate fostering of prejudice against non-humans, and why he did this.  Because he has made his people live in fear, they become angry, and thus he has given the humans among them a "legitimate" target for their anger (as opposed to the _true_ legitimate target--HIM!).  To this he adds, "The Empire has uniformity in its symbols and its ideology, which makes it easier to shame those who do not belong and to make them the objects of a galaxy's rage."

> _Sadly, Palpatine explains the root of prejudice.  But note that Sorzus Syn's contempt of_ [Sith] _Purebloods wholly gave way by my time.  Marr, Vowrawn, and I believed other prejudices could similarly give way.  It is a horrid shame Palpatine sought to undo it all. Imperius_

In Tarssus' Second Sith Empire, bigotry was definitely a thing...but it was _not_ universally expressed and there were even some on the Dark Council who, for various reasons, worked against it.  Marr and Vowrawn mainly did for pragmatic reasons--an Empire that does not tap ALL of its resources to their fullest, which is patently impossible with social stratification by irrelevant characteristics like species, ethnicity, and gender, is cutting itself off at the knees.  Imperius supported the repeal of legalized speciesism for both ideological and pragmatic reasons.

Palpatine goes on to add the following crude remark: "The Republic's alien species are the simplest targets.  Most humans of the Core already despise looking into their multiple eyes or listening to their clicking, buzzing languages.  They hate their bewildering customs and their sharp stench."

Which could not be further from the way our lovely Inquisitor approaches non-human species!  Something tells me Tarssus enjoyed standing around in spaceports and other major urban hubs, just people-watching.  Even though his Force-sense for all those people was weak, he _did_ have one, but even if he had not, his five senses would have been enough to keep him quite thoroughly entertained (and not in a demeaning way, but a genuine one). 

> _Prejudice can easily be overcome by a child's gentle curiosity in the face of difference--the love of learning. Imperius_

For this to work takes a society where not only is curiosity encouraged in people, but that it is welcomed when expressed, and the learning process is not seen as a danger and an offense.  As for Tarssus, while he very much has an adult's intellect, you've seen him in action by now, to see what I mean by "a child's gentle curiosity" remaining alive in the man, something for which I believe we must strive. 

In the following passage, Palpatine describes how he will deal with the remaining Force-sensitives who survived the destruction of the Jedi Order, and states that "those who still hold to the belief that there is virtue in 'peace'--or in closing one's self off to sensation--will be made to conform.  They must find value in the ways of the Dark."  As you know, Light as he is, Tarssus is still _Sith_.  He lives his passion, deeply, and resists the idea of being told to cut away attachments and pleasures.  But he is very cognizant of the _full_ truth, which Palpatine cuts short: 

> _There is no value in stagnation.  Nor is there value in coercion or indoctrination.  While I hope in my own way to see virtue in stagnation ended, it must be nurtured by discussion and example.  The time is now right for that in the wake of the Jedi and Bane's Sith. Imperius_

Palpatine next describes how he traps people in the Dark Side, making them feel permanently beholden to him.  Palpatine asserts (much like the Jedi!) that "after that moment, there is no return from the Dark Side."

> _Deterministic mythology.  It is believing this that ends hope, not some fatalistic law.  Break this chain and one can in fact regain his or her freedom.  I have done wrong, but did not fall for the lie of permanent damnation.  Imperius_

Luke states on this, "My heart aches for the Force-users who lived during Palpatine's dark times.  Being open about their gifts meant serving a monster."

> _As does mine.  In my day even though I had to hide my heresy from most, our diverse numbers provided that measure of freedom, even though with hardship. Imperius_

Ironically, the infighting and lack of unity among the pre-Rule of Two Sith Order _allowed_ one such as Tarssus Kallig to exist and try to live out his beliefs!

From this, Palpatine goes on to describe his manipulations of life, describing how he will "warp life on a broad scale" and create beings of his own design.  Tarssus has his thoughts on this: 

> _I hope that these atrocities--which we must never forget!--do not prevent investigation into healing arts.  Could extinct species be revived to put a ravaged ecosystem right, or a custom custodian of such a world be created and let to live in contentedness? Imperius_

Imagine, for example, a creature that happily eats nuclear fallout and excretes it in a safer form, thus doing a cleanup job that benefits it and everything else around it.  It's hard to imagine such a creature (at least for me, anyway) being miserable like Sorzus Syn's or Palpatine's evil creations.

Heck, I've even heard some people suggest on Earth that the Arctic tundra got out of whack when the wooly mammoth died off, and that reintroducing a large herbivore to the area would help put things right.  Obviously a _lot_ of cautious research would be needed IRL to see if that would actually work, but Tarssus is certainly thinking of things like that in his own universe. 

Luke concludes _The Book of Sith_ with one final piece of commentary that serves as a tragic reflection upon everything that he knows about: "No Sith has ever truly cared for another being.  I understand that the lure of individual power is seductive, but to follow the Sith is to give up on others.  It's the death of hope.  I sometimes wonder how they attract any followers at all."

I will let Tarssus Kallig speak for himself as he gets the last word and brings the book full circle. 

> _I grieve the loss of the memory of those of us Sith who truly did love, far more than I do any other knowledge of my existence and that of my compatriots.  I grieve the fact that this was our epitaph.  I do have hope.  I have hope that with the coming and the passing of the _Sith'ari _, we can rebuild stronger, better, and driven by the burning of the Light.  I am Tarssus Kallig, Darth Imperius.  I am Sith.  And I hope.  And I love._


End file.
